Voice Letters: Readers Weigh In on Clinton's Carbon Conflict
We Can't All Afford a Carbon Tax
A carbon tax will raise the utility bills of too many poor Americans, despite promises to the contrary ["Debate Exposes Clinton's Carbon Conflict," Voice, April 20].
— James Jones
It's a Complicated Issue
Let's just assume evil intent — isn't that how we treat Hillary? Or, could it be that the mere mention of a "carbon tax" is to place a nice target on her back for the GOP, who would crow, "Just another tax-and-spend Democrat." Yes, a carbon fee and dividend is the most effective single policy anyone can mention, but could you explain why in six seconds?
— Jan Freed
We Can Make It Work
A carbon tax that is revenue-neutral and is compensated by tax cuts elsewhere should not harm the poor and middle class.
— Nigel Franks
Of Course Money Buys Influence
What a shock that Hillary is bought by Big Energy, just like by Wall Street and by Big Pharma. Turns out all those huge contributions to her super-PACs really DO influence her policies. Who'd have thunk it?
— Fred White
Why Bother Trying If We're the Only Ones?
It is so false and so dishonest to lay global warming at the feet of anyone in U.S. politics. We are certainly major contributors, but the idea that if we'd simply acted a decade ago the ice shelf would be fine is absurd. China exists. India exists. Europe exists. Russia exists. They all contribute to the problem, and we do not have the ability to dictate their policies. It's this kind of intellectual laziness, this absurd moral narcissism, that holds the environmental movement back.
— Michael Grant
We've Already Had Sugar and Tea Taxes
I am tired of all the taxing. George Washington and the boys revolted at overreaching government. Carbon tax is just another redistribution-of-wealth scheme. What a disgrace.
— Dan Sexton
A Debate Is No Time to Work Out Policy Positions
As a longtime advocate of carbon taxes, it's a complicated issue. It's the most efficient and effective way to shift people and businesses to climate-friendly fuels, but you also have to determine what to do with the revenues. To have the desired effect on the mix of fuels, the carbon tax must be pretty high. So in periods in which many people's incomes have been depressed, you need to recycle those revenues back to most people through payroll tax breaks or household rebates. Sanders ignores these issues, so his climate policy would leave middle-income households considerably worse off at a time when they can't afford it. Hillary understands these second-order issues, but a debate is not the time to parse them. Give her time when she's the nominee.
— Rob Shapiro
There's No Compromising in Congress
She'd need at least some Republicans to vote in favor of levying such a tax, and she knows that's never happening. Name me at least three Republicans who would willingly sign their name to such a tax — keeping in mind that the vast majority of them have signed a pledge with the Club for Growth. This is exactly why, while I agree with Bernie on the issues, I disagree with how he thinks he'll implement them.
— Kathy Bright
Nothing's Going to Change
What good is a tax on polluters? All they do is just pollute more and say, "I paid my tax. I'm exempted."
— Kirk Christian Linn-Degrassi
Don't Bite the Hand That Feeds You
Kind of hard to tax those who fund your campaign.
— Scott Roddy
Rome Didn't Go Carbon-Neutral in a Day
She didn't actually say no; why assume she is totally against it? Hillary knows, and Bernie admitted it: There has to be a transition both here and internationally. We are not going to replace a million cars in a short time.
— Kody Joseph King
Democrats Always Ruin It for Themselves
This is yet another example of progressives eating their allies. Both HRC and Sanders agree on the threat of climate change. The question is how to address carbon emissions. A carbon tax affects the poor and low-income people the hardest because gas, electricity, and heating are a larger part of their budgets. The tax will merely be passed on to those who can least afford it. It is bad enough that we have polarization between liberal and conservative, but progressives do themselves no favors by attacking liberal/left leadership over differing approaches to the same goal.
— Hal Ross
Get the ICYMI: Today's Top Stories Newsletter
Catch up on the day's news and stay informed with our daily digest of the most popular news, music, food and arts stories in New York, delivered to your inbox.